On Friday 21 September 2007 11:58, you wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 01:17:32PM +0300, Jusa Saari wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:07:44 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > Also I'd expect *generally* that long range swaps occur mostly towards the > > > beginning of a node's lifetime, rather than later on. > > > > In a stable network with long-living nodes, yes. The few times I tried to > > get into the "darknet", I lost all my contacts (from #freenet-refs or > > whatever it was called) in a week or so. This would likely be true of > > opennet as well; in fact I'd say that at any time, most freenet nodes have > > only been in the network for a short time. > > > > This could potentially mean that, since those short-lived nodes are unable > > to do anything very useful, the semi-permanent network nodes which form > > the "core" of Freenet will end up serving most requests, and therefore get > > overloaded easily, while the nodes not directly connected to them won't be > > able to find anything. > > Right, what is needed is a way for nodes to hang on to the network even if > they have only been exposed to the network once. Perhaps this does not have > to be a guarantee, but something that will work with high probability. My > naive(?) proposal has been to remember a set of opennet nodes seen (on the > order of 10-100) and attempt to get back into the network with these if they > have a free slot available. I think others want to make in some sophisticatd > way that I have not fully understood.
Well, we have the opennet reconnecting problem, and we have the universal reconnecting problem... The first is that opennet auto-dumps disconnected peers after 5 minutes if there are nodes being offered. The second is that the nodes you were connected to probably aren't on the network anymore anyway because they were newbies and they got tired of it. :( > > > Is there a way to simulate the effect of constantly adding and shortly > > afterwards removing large amounts of node to Freenet? > > To simulate the actual freenet topology is hard, noone knows exactly how > it grows. But there are ideal models (edges added as in the Kleinberg > model). You can add and remove nodes in that topology. The problem with > simulations is that they typically either say something about a very good > topology, or something about when its rather rather poor for what we can > expect with scaling. > > /Vilhelm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20070921/5a12e34e/attachment.pgp>
